There are laws for the rich

[46zilzal]

Then those for everyone else.


Senate Republicans block windfall taxes on Big Oil

By H. Josef Hebert / Associated Press

WASHINGTON - Saved by Senate Republicans, big oil companies dodged an attempt Tuesday to slap them with a windfall profits tax and take away billions of dollars in tax breaks in response to the record gasoline prices that have the nation fuming.

GOP senators shoved aside the Democratic proposal, arguing that punishing Big Oil won't do a thing to lower the $4-a-gallon-price of gasoline that is sending economic waves across the country. High prices at the pump are threatening everything from summer vacations to Meals on Wheels deliveries to the elderly.

[riskman]

If the windfall profits tax is enacted once again it will be harmful to the long-term production capacity of the industry, which will cause gas prices to then become higher yet. At that point our FEARLESS LEADERS will likely start calling for price controls, an even more disastrous and pretentious policy. Not to mention the fact that a windfall profits tax is also a pure act of legalized theft, plain and simple, no different than a Mafia shakedown.

But there is a case to be made for a kind of windfall profits tax: A tax on windfall political profits is indeed desirable. Our fearless leaders cannot legally take home personally more than a minor share (in salary and perks) of the income they steal from us through taxation. But they "profit" from taxes nevertheless by using billions and billions of dollars to buy votes from various political constituencies in order to perpetuate their political careers. Then, in many cases, after spending years in Congress giving away our hard-earned dollars to various undeserving individuals and groups, they retire to earn large salaries from those very groups or to become lobbyists for the groups and use their political connections to keep this carnival of theft and plunder going. That is how our fearless leaders profit personally from tax revenue.

[PaceAdvantage]

A windfall tax on oil companies will only lead to one thing....higher prices at the pump, as if we need more of that...

Do you think the oil companies, or ANY company for that matter, is simply going to absorb this tax without passing on the cost to the consumer?

This is what those on the left fail to understand about their highly destructive polices....filled with good intentions....:lol:

[JustRalph]

I waited all day for somebody to post a thread about this crap.

I actually heard Bernie Sanders of Vermont on the radio today. He said that this tax would drive the price at the pump down

This man is an idiot.

This was tried in the 70's and failed miserably.

Any tax levied against a business goes straight to the consumer in the form of higher prices. Why is that so hard to understand????

[Tom]

Three cheers for the repubs, who blcoked a bonehead dem move that would have only hurt the working stiffs. They tax the profits, then what?

Not one cent of that money would ever get back to you and me. It would - all of it - go to pork projects and anyone who says different is a liar.

It would not lower the price of gas, it would not go to help anyone except the pols themselves.

The only proposal I have heard that makes sense is McCain's - temporarily suspend the federal gas tax. That directly lowers the price we pay. Short term yes, but at least effective for a while. The dems' would be INSTANT price increases. Couple that with cap and trace, and gas would hit $6 a gallon this summer.

Whatever a dem says, look for the exact opposite too happen.:lol:


The dems love people like 46 who drink thier kool aid and then ouke it out as if it were true.

[DJofSD]

You democrats are a bunch of IDIOTS. You know nothing about economics or history. Windfall profits only punish the consumer and they've been tried before.

Idiots, idiots, idiots.

[Tom]

Who gets hurt?
Eveyone with an oil company in thier retirement account.
Why didn't Obama know that?


Chris Dodd, demo-flunky, said yesterday that Congress whould look across the board and set limits for all corpoate profits. When did he get the lobotomy????

[DJofSD]

Tom, BHO does not hold any stocks or mutual funds. He has no exposure to the equities market. He might be really good about making changes but don't expect him to participate in the experience. It's the old do as I say and not do as I do routine.

[ddog]

as usual you guys pile on after the whistle.

1. do you think the oilco should be getting tax breaks?

2. should oilco have been buying back stock and paying bonus instead of investing that in production/exploration?

3. do you honestly not understand still that a tax to control the floor price of oil implemented 10 years ago when it should would have us in a much better position today as it would have allowed the oilco to have cover to take more risk on our behalf?

4. the top 5-6 oilco should be broken up, they are not providing any benefit at all, the small fry as usual are where the action is in regards to oil finds.
yes, mabelle they are finding and producing oil right here.

whistle game over.

[Lefty]

Once again, zilly and the socialistas he admires, prove they don't know diddly about how the real world operates.
Dims cry about dependency on foreign oil then bock every attempt to use our own resources to help do just that!

[Tom]

All that stuff would be expected...if we lived in RUSSIA!
We need more oil, not taxes.

[ddog]

as usual , even as you guys are falling off the cliff of life, you will not remove the blinders.

yes , more oil is needed as is less demand.

thus Clinto/Mccain nutty "oil-pander to the little peeps" idea of encouraging demand by using a socialist market device for a short-term fix , which will not help either in the short term(3 months) or long term at all.


Ol Left is obviuosly the one (self demonstrated) on this board that hasn't a clue.

Just as the breakup of all large monopolies when broken up lead to lower prices and more supply , so the top oil monoplies deserve the same fate now.

Actually Russia would be just what we are doing now, concentrate the oil in the hands of a few. Terrible analogy even as a joke.

[ddog]

oh, and by the way, I couldn't care less about 401K.
The future security of this country is at stake.

[Lefty]

well, dog. At least I can do basic math. Less taxes more money. A concept you can't get. We need more oil and btw, we can't control the world's demand but we can increase our supply and also use nuclear power.
If it didn't work in 70's, this windfall profit tax, then why would it work now.
You and zilly can call me names, don't care, but when you say things like you don't care about 401k's you give your socialist leanings away. You just said you don't care about individuals and govt should be all. OMG!

[King Ritchie]

Didn't we already try this Windfall tax stuff under Jimmy Carter? GREAT. Back to gas lines and rationing and mortgages at 25% interest.

I know........Libs get their gas on the weekends and the conversatives the rest of the week - afterall libs don't need gas on weekdays since few of them actually go to work anyway.

[ddog]

Didn't we already try this Windfall tax stuff under Jimmy Carter? GREAT. Back to gas lines and rationing and mortgages at 25% interest.

I know........Libs get their gas on the weekends and the conversatives the rest of the week - afterall libs don't need gas on weekdays since few of them actually go to work anyway.


King,

yes and that's not what I posted about.

nothing the like between the two.

get serious.

you could slap a confiscatory windfall tax and you will not have gas lines now.

the world does change belive it or not.

I am not for taxing the oil co but I am not for them wasting the monies they get in a ponzi stock buyback scheme which did not help anyone in the medium run.

Go get some facts , look it up for yourself.

buyback did nothing to help long-term stock price, nothing at all.

just like Enron and the like, they rob you and you like it.

[ddog]

well, dog. At least I can do basic math. Less taxes more money. A concept you can't get. We need more oil and btw, we can't control the world's demand but we can increase our supply and also use nuclear power.
If it didn't work in 70's, this windfall profit tax, then why would it work now.
You and zilly can call me names, don't care, but when you say things like you don't care about 401k's you give your socialist leanings away. You just said you don't care about individuals and govt should be all. OMG!

Do you fall out of bed on your head EVERY DAY!.
you seem incapable of rational discourse.

You are a non-thinker of the lowest kind a true sheeple.

In a contest between the future security of this country and your worthless 401K which would you choose?


We can control OUR OWN demand.
I am not talking about a windfall tax on the oil co.
I am not talking about a windfall tax on the oil co.

And, how much have you fought for nuke pwr and coal burning plants in the last 15 years?
Which town councils have you lobbied, which gvt reps have you lobbied for same, I have been for both for 15 years you dimbulb.


You are just beyond sanity most of the time.

[46zilzal]

Do you fall out of bed on your head EVERY DAY!.
you seem incapable of rational discourse.

You are a non-thinker of the lowest kind a true sheeple.


You hit the nail on the head so to speak. INCAPABLE is the word.

[NoDayJob]

Then those for everyone else.


Senate Republicans block windfall taxes on Big Oil

By H. Josef Hebert / Associated Press

WASHINGTON - Saved by Senate Republicans, big oil companies dodged an attempt Tuesday to slap them with a windfall profits tax and take away billions of dollars in tax breaks in response to the record gasoline prices that have the nation fuming.

GOP senators shoved aside the Democratic proposal, arguing that punishing Big Oil won't do a thing to lower the $4-a-gallon-price of gasoline that is sending economic waves across the country. High prices at the pump are threatening everything from summer vacations to Meals on Wheels deliveries to the elderly.

My suggestion is for you to quit your bitchin' and become rich. It ain't easy, but you live in America so you have more opportunities than anywhere on earth.

[46zilzal]

My suggestion is for you to quit your bitchin' and become rich. It ain't easy, but you live in America so you have more opportunities than anywhere on earth.
Yes many of the CLOWNS I went to school with, who used to be friends and are now only acquaintances, NOW worship at the alter of the almighty dollar and have lost all sense of life. Let 'em: they are missing the point of living.

[ddog]

don't tar me with that brush, I AIN'T agin' money.
I have tried both, more is better.

[46zilzal]

don't tar me with that brush, I AIN'T agin' money.
I have tried both, more is better.
Only explaining about my circle of acquaintances.

I used to rake in the money and it wasn't as good as it is today. Different strokes different folks.

[Tom]

Maybe it wasn't the money why they left you. :rolleyes:

[46zilzal]

Maybe it wasn't the money why they left you.
Interesting attempt to turn a statement around 180 degrees.

[NoDayJob]

Maybe it wasn't the money why they left you. :rolleyes:

Monkeyman: :lol: :lol: :lol:

[JustRalph]

You idea to "break up the largest oil companies" is stupid.

Considering the top 20 largest oil companies in the world are all foreign. We have no control over them. In spite of Americans screaming about "big oil" the American companies that our Congress would have any control over, are some of the smallest in the world. Get real............a tax flows thru to the consumer every time. End of story

[ddog]

You idea to "break up the largest oil companies" is stupid.

Considering the top 20 largest oil companies in the world are all foreign. We have no control over them. In spite of Americans screaming about "big oil" the American companies that our Congress would have any control over, are some of the smallest in the world. Get real............a tax flows thru to the consumer every time. End of story


sorry mr. myopic.

I think you meant to say 14 of the top 20?
If not pls support here.....................

Our market is the largest , we need to do what we can on our side of the pond both to encourage risk(big will not take risk-they wish to avoid and protect).


A tax to support the bottom price is the only rational way we could have avoided what anybody with eyes could see coming.

I for one would have been willing to pay more tax only IF THE PRICE DROPPED BELOW THE FLOOR to support long-term thinking by the companies, which we do/did not have.
The TAX would have gone to the OIL COMPANIES, so yes that's the whole effect I wished for.
Support them with whatever extra funds they needed to do the job we as a COUNTRY needed.



Go back to the original questions , try them all , humor me.

[hcap]

I know........Libs get their gas on the weekends and the conversatives the rest of the week - afterall libs don't need gas on weekdays since few of them actually go to work anyway.Hey Kingy, it appears some faux "conversatives" like yourself emit more gas than they consume

[Tom]

LCD, hcap, LCD.

[hcap]

Tom, sometimes the jargon of the younger generation around here have me a wonderin'

LCD?

[Tom]

Lowest common denominator....what your comment about Lefty was.

[hcap]

Huh? You posted on the wrong thread.
That pertains to the "Putz thread.

I thought you were 'splainin' how to spell "conversatives" to "Kingy"

[PaceAdvantage]

Tom, BHO does not hold any stocks or mutual funds.How can you state such nonsense with such conviction?

http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/Investing/MutualFunds/ALookAtBarackObamaTheInvestor.aspx

[ddog]

That was interesting,I didn't know that, seems perfectly ok to me.
The guy could generate some quick bucks by writting the books and he wants slow steady gains without risk.

[Lefty]

Do you fall out of bed on your head EVERY DAY!.
you seem incapable of rational discourse.

You are a non-thinker of the lowest kind a true sheeple.

In a contest between the future security of this country and your worthless 401K which would you choose?


We can control OUR OWN demand.
I am not talking about a windfall tax on the oil co.
I am not talking about a windfall tax on the oil co.

And, how much have you fought for nuke pwr and coal burning plants in the last 15 years?
Which town councils have you lobbied, which gvt reps have you lobbied for same, I have been for both for 15 years you dimbulb.


You are just beyond sanity most of the time.

Yes, this is certainly rational discourse you have presented here.

[DJofSD]

How can you state such nonsense with such conviction?

http://articles.moneycentral.msn.co...heInvestor.aspx

Well, I guess I was wrong.

[NJ Stinks]

Barron's defines the term "Windfall Profits Tax" as a:

tax on profits that result from a sudden windfall to a particular company or industry. In 1980, federal legislation was passed that levied such a tax on oil companies because of the profits they earned as a result of the sharp increase in oil prices in the 1970's. Since then the tax has not been reenacted."

Barron's defines the term "Windfall Profit" as a:

profit that occurs suddenly as a result of an event not controlled by the person or company profiting from the event. For example, oil companies profited in the 1970's from an explosion in the price of oil brought about by the Arab oil embargo and the price increases demanded by the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries.
__________________________________________________ __________

What event(s) led to the latest windfall profits earned by U.S. oil companies? Instability in the Middle East would appear to be the biggest culprit. What caused this instability? The Iraqi War. When liberals say this administration is in bed with U.S. oil companies, we are told we are paranoid. We are spouting nonsense.

As Al Michaels likes to say: "Do you believe in miracles?" :rolleyes:

[Lefty]

njstinks. You are spouting nonsense.